Tom Z Interviews Political Prisoners Jake Lang 11-14-23

PRAYERS ANSWERED!!! SCOTUS Agrees to Take up Appeal of BOGUS Jan 6th "Obstruction of an Official Proceeding" Felony Charge!!
Click Here to Read the Details!

Click the Arrow Above to Watch/Hear the Video

Jan 6th Political Prisoner Jake Lang talked to Tom Zawistowski from the DC Gulag on November 14, 2023 about his personal situation and the efforts he is making to defend his Constitutional Rights and Gain his Freedom. Here is what we discussed:

  • What is the Status of your Appeal to the Supreme Court on the charge of "Obstructing an Official Proceeding"? (See MAJOR Update Below!)
  • Does the fact that a Democrat Congressman who intentionally pulled a Fire Alarm to stop a vote of Congress in a blatant effort to "Obstruct an Official Proceeding" only received a slap on the wrist help your case with the Supreme Court?
  • Has their been any improvement in your treatment by prison guards since the assurances made by U.S. Bureau of Prisons Director Colette Peters to Matt Gaetz in the Novemver 7th Congressional Hearing pledging to prohibit retribution against Jan 6th Prisoners?
  • What can Patriots do to help you and the other January 6th Prisoners and their Families at this time?

Patriots can make a monthly contribution to help cover expenses for Jan 6th Prisoners and their families for as little as $20 per month by Clicking on this Link:


BREAKING: First Two Jan. 6 Appeals Reach Supreme Court

Court to decide whether to accept appeals in two key cases that could impact thousands of other Jan. 6 cases.

By Joseph M. Hanneman, The Epoch Times, Nov 15, 2023

The U.S. Supreme Court has set a conference for Dec. 1 on whether to accept two key Jan. 6 case appeals—one involving a federal agent who carried his firearm at the U.S. Capitol and the other on the Department of Justice’s controversial use of evidence-tampering law to prosecute Jan. 6 defendants for felony obstruction of Congress.

Edward Jacob Lang (FBI court filing).

If either or both of the petitions are accepted, it will be the first time a Jan. 6-related case is reviewed by the Supreme Court.

On Nov. 14, the court listed both cases as "distributed for conference" on Dec. 1.

Defense attorney Marina Medvin, who is involved in both cases, said it should be clear by Dec. 4 if the court will issue orders, accept or reject the petitions for review, or hold the cases over for another conference.

The first case—Edward Jacob Lang, Petitioner v. United States—could impact hundreds of defendants accused of the most frequently charged Jan. 6 felony. Corruptly obstructing an official proceeding, which carries a potential 20-year prison term, has been charged in 317 cases, according to the latest DOJ tally.

Dozens of Jan. 6 defendants have already been convicted under the law, which has never been used in such a way since it was implemented in 2002 as a means to curb corporate financial fraud.

Attorneys for Mr. Lang and three other Jan. 6 defendants who filed an amici curiae brief in the case say the DOJ’s weaponization of the statute represents dangerous prosecutorial overreach.

“If the Biden DOJ’s adventurism is allowed to stand, it will permanently change the ability of the government to suppress the rights of American citizens," legal researcher Jonathon Moseley told The Epoch Times in October.

"Every American will be at the whim of any prosecutor to terrorize them.”

The DOJ said the High Court should not intervene, allowing the prosecutions to proceed.

“At a minimum, the government should be permitted to present its case to a jury and prove that petitioners obstructed a proceeding by [in part] preventing the relevant decision-makers from viewing the evidence at the time and place specified for that purpose,” reads the DOJ’s opposition document.

Democrat Rep. Gets Slap on the Wrist for Pulling the Fire Alarm to Delay Congressional Vote- 10/26/23

Preventing the joint session of Congress from tallying the Electoral College votes from the 2020 presidential election “constitutes evidence-focused obstruction,” the DOJ wrote, likening what protesters did at the Capitol to locking up evidence from the election in a vault where it couldn't be accessed.

DEA Agent's Handgun

The second case involves the prosecution of a former Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agent for carrying his service pistol and credentials onto Capitol grounds on Jan. 6.

Mark Sami Ibrahim, 35, of Anaheim, Calif., faces three federal charges: entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds with a deadly or dangerous weapon, carrying a firearm on Capitol grounds, and injuries to property for climbing on a statue at the edge of Capitol grounds.

 Former DEA Special Agent Mark Ibrahim is being prosecuted for having his service weapon at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, something he said he was legally allowed to do. (Capitol Punishment/Bark at the Hole Productions)

Former DEA Special Agent Mark Ibrahim is being prosecuted for having his service weapon at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, something he said he was legally allowed to do. (Capitol Punishment/Bark at the Hole Productions)

Mr. Ibrahim comes from a military and law-enforcement family. Before joining the DEA, he served for years in U.S. Army intelligence. His brother is an Army veteran who became an FBI special agent. His sister is a U.S. Navy veteran, and his mother was at the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001.

Mr. Ibrahim's appeal argues that even though he was off-duty on Jan. 6, he was legally authorized by federal law to carry his service weapon on Capitol grounds. DEA regulations encourage agents to carry their weapons and credentials at all times, the appeals petition says.

"The prosecution of this case breaks faith with countless federal law enforcement officers who make themselves available around the clock, 24-7, and carry their agency-issued weapons per agency directives," the document states.

"Failure to address the question of the law’s exemption breeds uncertainty and shakes any remaining confidence of the public and the law enforcement officers in the application of the laws."

Click Here to Watch the Newest We the People Convention News & Opinion Podcast!

United States District Judge Timothy Kelly in March ruled against Ms. Medvin's motion to dismiss Count 3 of the indictment, which charged Mr. Ibrahim under 40 U.S. Code § 5104 for having a firearm on Capitol grounds.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit dismissed Mr. Ibrahim's appeal on June 2, and denied a rehearing of the dismissal on Sept. 11.

Ms. Medvin earlier secured the dismissal of Count 4, which charged her client with making a false statement to the FBI.

She has also argued that Mr. Ibrahim is the victim of selective prosecution by the DOJ, which she said targeted her client because of his political beliefs.

"Mr. Ibrahim carried flags associated with the conservative movement, he stated that part of the reason he attended was to support President Trump, and he publicly lamented the shooting death of unarmed conservative protester Ashli Babbitt," Ms. Medvin wrote in a July 2022 motion. "These political expressions were investigated by the government in-depth even though none of these conservative beliefs were elements of any criminal offenses."


Jake Lang Interview 11-14-23 by Tom Zawistowski is licensed under

New Podcast Posted Every Week!

Watch ANY ARCHIVE of the We the People Convention Podcast by clicking on "PLAYLIST".

Recent News

Trump Statement on Abortion
Trump Statement on Abortion

Trump Statement on Abortion


British Cass Report Calls for End to use of Puberty Blockers
British Cass Report Calls for End to use of Puberty Blockers

The Cass report and the unforgivable puberty blockers scandal


Commission Finds China Rigged Canadian Elections
Commission Finds China Rigged Canadian Elections

Canadian Intelligence Commission Finds China Interfered in Last Two Elections


Latest Video

Klingenstein's Trump's Virtues Part II
Klingenstein's Trump's Virtues Part II

Second video where Tom Klingenstein spells out the Virtues of Donald Trump


©2024, We the People Convention